My sister is sitting straight up on the end of our living room couch, her eyes refusing to waver from our large flat-screen TV. She’s been binge-watching “House of Cards” for nearly four hours now, and in this particular episode, President Underwood is threatening his own wife in the most overdramatic, Machiavellian manner I have ever witnessed. My sister is hanging on the fictional president’s every word in pure awe of what she believes is a dramatically accurate picture of the dark side of American politics. Meanwhile, I sit there in utter disgust at the almost insane depiction of American politics. I hate political dramas.
In total truth, I have seen nearly every major political drama put to TV, Netflix and HBO. Being highly interested in politics naturally leads me to watching a fictionalized version of my obsession. Yet the current political climate has brought me to begin to despise these shows.
Americans distrust our government, and our current election cycle clearly shows that. Candidates on both sides of the aisle have vowed to work against the establishment and the typical government bureaucracy that they say has failed the American people. To add to this distrust, the public also lacks a basic understanding of the functions and responsibilities of our government. For example, the Annenberg Public Policy Center reported that a little more than a third of Americans could name all three branches of the U.S. government. This fundamental lack of understanding of our complex government, paired with a growing distrust of politicians, leaves us in today’s chaotic presidential election.
The public’s “imagination” of what politicians do within the upper echelons of government can be somewhat attributed to the emergence of American political dramas. Shows like “The West Wing,” “Scandal” and “House of Cards” are truly terrible guides to the way our government operates and how our politicians work. Yet these shows are extraordinarily entertaining and addictive. They carry massive audiences through multiple seasons, winning awards, securing excellent ratings, all at the expense of shaping false misconceptions of the politicians of our country. The shows personify politics to a crippling degree, oversimplify the policy making of our massive bureaucracy, and most importantly, cast politicians as these scheming sociopaths who manipulate and warp the system for their own benefit. These factors culminate to a false representation of our government within the minds of millions of Americans, and as the current election cycle shows, unorthodox candidates can capitalize on this ignorance.
America got its first taste of political drama in 1999 with the NBC series “The West Wing.” Though the show was well received from an entertainment standpoint, many of the more politically informed viewers were disappointed with its “personality-driven politics,” to quote an article from The Atlantic. It portrayed a false image of what happens within the levels of bureaucracy in our government. Individual characters tackled massive responsibilities and challenges that have been unsolvable for decades. For example, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is solved in a matter of a few episodes, prompting this idea that major conflicts can be solved through some personal “heart to heart” negotiation and compromising policy between understanding individuals.
But who could blame NBC? “The West Wing” was only entertaining when the cast was able to solve the unsolvable through their hard work and dedication. What audience wants to watch an Israeli-Palestinian compromise descend into failure? Or see a debate over what entitlements to cut for poorer Americans? Or listen to presidential candidates speak about banning entire religions or how much the United States will torture its military prisoners? Well unfortunately, that is the reality, and these dramas only add to making that reality worse in the fact that viewers are led to believe in a false possibility within the over-personified and simplified politics of shows like “The West Wing.”
Yet, the more prevailing effect that TV political dramas have on their misinformed viewers is convincing them of a darker reality in which politicians operate. To put it simply, to be a politician within this country, one must also be a sociopath. The political drama “House of Cards” bludgeons this point to death. Within America, Kevin Spacey’s character seems to have molded the archetype for politicians: an apolitical madman who uses policy and his position solely for the advancement of his power.
What’s more is the contrast between the U.K. and U.S. versions of “House of Cards.” In the U.K. version, the main protagonist’s self-interest and desire to gain and hold power is rooted in the fact that he believes his policy agenda and legislative ability will come to benefit the country. His ruthless acts are thereby a means to a rational end. In contrast with the U.S. version, the protagonist comes off as almost apolitical throughout the entire show. His ambitions are simply to become the most powerful man in the world. This presents the idea that the problem with American politics is not borne of a particular party or ideology, but rather the American political system itself — that, in fact, our political landscape is dominated not by partisan hawks or doves, but by a power-hungry class of elites competing for influence and domination.
Yet these shows are made for one purpose, for my sister to sit on the edge of our couch hanging on every word. Is it the responsibility of TV networks and producers to ensure an accurate representation of American politics is delivered to their audience? Of course not — these are TV dramas meant to capture massive audiences and achieve high ratings. The writers and producers of these shows are simply capitalizing on the ignorance and disdain toward the American political machine.
Besides, some may argue a positive effect is that these shows have helped push more people to become involved in the political landscape of America, due to their newfound interest these shows have fostered. Does not the benefit (a more politically interested public), outweigh the costs (a few inaccuracies and over dramatizations)?
No. Though these shows individually may have a few inaccuracies or oversimplifications, their aggregate effect relates to the overall problem that is the reason why these dramas have become a success. These shows capitalize on how the present-day American citizenship is too misinformed, untrustworthy and divided toward its government and politicians. Add in the rising intensity of partisanship, and this lack of pragmatism leads to strict, often ignorant, blind party ideology alignment.
Most importantly today, this phenomenon allows for the emergence of unorthodox candidates capitalizing on this growing hatred. These shows that add to this negative perception can only lead to further missteps within our political system. How much will the misrepresentations and inaccuracies affect the voting decisions of the general public? It appears as if the presidential election cycle of 2016 has answered that.
Michael Mordarski can be reached at mmordars@umich.edu.